Community Voices - Voters Pamphlet
Our community has made its opposition to the Dune Grading Initiative clear. In the voters’ pamphlet, many arguments against the initiative were submitted by community members, alongside environmental organizations advocating for a healthy, strong, and resilient shoreline.
These thoughtful and compelling statements address the legal, environmental, and community concerns at the heart of this issue. We invite you to read them, share them, and learn more about why protecting our extraordinary coastal landscape matters.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION
City of Cannon Beach, Measure 4-243
Source: Clatsop County voters pamphlet
VOTE NO ON MEASURE 4-243, THE DUNE DESTROYER
I understand that taller dunes can mean less of an ocean view
and may affect the resale value of some oceanfront homes. That
is real. But protecting our whole community for the long term
is more important than the temporary loss of view for a small
minority.
Measure 4-243 would have the City lower and reshape dunes
that help protect all of us, largely to improve views for a few
oceanfront property owners. It would also leave Cannon Beach
taxpayers responsible for the cost.
Our dunes have a job to do. Let them do it.
I’m voting NO on Dune Destroyer Measure 4-243.
This information furnished by:
Harvey Claussen
↔
Natural Dunes, Safer Community: Vote NO to Keep Cannon Beach’s Dunes Strong.
Don’t be fooled by this initiative. The people behind it have
oceanfront places overlooking Cannon Beach’s dunes, and they
want to get their views back. That’s it, plain and simple.
We know, because our condo is in Breakers Point. We were living
HERE during the City’s Foredune Management Plan revision
process, and we heard lots of resentment at Breakers Point
that they weren’t allowed to grade the dunes. Their tune hasn’t
changed; they’ve just changed the lyrics.
We say, Don’t Be Fooled. Because this measure is worded so
vaguely and imprecisely that it could - and would - be used
to pressure our City into ill-considered actions with long-term
consequences that endanger our little community. This measure
would use YOUR TAX DOLLARS to get the oceanfront owners
their views.
The beach is always changing. Forces of nature shape the dunes.
We accept that. We know we can’t always walk to the beach the
easy way. And we’re grateful to the dunes for protecting us - all of
us - from the worst of the weather and the waves.
Remember: Cannon Beach already has a comprehensive
Foredune Management Plan, which was years in the crafting.
Cannon Beach solicited and incorporated input from recognized
experts in shoreline science and management. In contrast, those
pushing this measure have done neither.
No other city in Oregon manages the foredunes the way this
Initiative proposes. Furthermore, our City’s public safety officials
have stated that dunes conditions do NOT impair emergency
response, and that dune modification would NOT improve fire-
fighting operations or safety.
Our dunes protect us from the weather. Our dunes protect us
from the ocean. Our dunes stand between us and the rising King
Tides. Yes, the King Tides and winter storms carve away sand,
sometimes making our usual beach access inadvisable. Let’s
be more like Mother Nature; let’s take another path. Walk a little
farther; find the open way.
This information furnished by:
John & Sarah Davis, full-time residents at Breakers Point
↔
Back in 2019 they were told unequivocally, “no”. Yet, we’re
in deja vu mode with the pretentiously titled “Cannon Beach
Sustainable Dunes Coalition.” First of all, the dunes can sustain
themselves. They don’t need help from y’all.
Proponents of this recurrent effort produced a propaganda
video full of disingenuous misinformation and duplicitous imagery.
Within the shoddy logic of this video two catchwords repeat to
justify industrial scraping of sand from our beach: “safety” and
“accessibility”. Nobody argues with those two concerns. Safety is
why this municipality funds the police, fire department, and beach
lifeguards.
I was a lifeguard on Cannon Beach’s shore for nearly three
decades. I’ve also surfed the waters along the entire strand for
years. My leisure hours are in direct contact and contemplation
of our natural environment. I know the situation from genuine
experience on our beach, not from the comfy confines of some
beachfront bagnio.
During my entire tenure as a lifeguard in Cannon Beach we
never had any crisis concerning the dunes, not one. Nothing. Not
one emergency in that regard.
Then, the unmitigated canard of “accessibility”. Accessibility
mechanisms are already in place. On this very beach, our beloved
governor, Tom McCall, had a high noon showdown with scofflaws
who wanted to manipulate Oregon’s legacy of public beach
access for their own cupidity. He didn’t back down. Thus, since
1967 the state of Oregon has mandated accessibility. So, let’s
not conflate a “public good” “coalition” with this personal desire
sleight of hand. There are a myriad of beach access points in this
town and plenty of programs addressing beach accessibility.
This latest go-round, asks those of us who actually live and
work in the area to approve an initiative that is vague, vacuous,
already wastes our time, and has potential for usurping money
that both the city and state could put to good and real use.
Anyone voting for this self-serving proposal will rue their gullibility
in short order.
This information furnished by:
John Rippey
↔
Please Vote No on Measure 4-243 - Public Cost for Private Gain!
I am a surfer and published author in the ICES Journal of Marine
Science - don’t vote against science!
Listen to the science: Experts in past City Council meetings
have already said that dune formation and erosion are natural
processes driven by wind, waves, and storms, not something we
can easily control.
Dunes are dynamic: This is a wild ecosystem that could take
decades to recover if we mess with it. We shouldn’t be trying to
tame a beautiful and natural landscape for personal benefit.
Misuse of tax dollars: Why are we using city funds for this
instead of real community projects like the NeCus Community
Center? The people pushing for this are the same millionaire hotel
and restaurant owners that voted against the NeCus Community
Center and Food Tax. Are they happy about spending over half
as much on the new NeCus park idea, which is $6+M for a shelter
as opposed to $12+M for a beautiful center we all could have
enjoyed? Are they happy the Food Tax is working as designed
and we’re now fire protected? Why spend City monies grading
dunes and not for things we all benefit from? The clear answer is
they want to spend your tax dollars to change the landscape
for their own private gain. Their messaging about access is
crafty, but disingenuous and a gross misrepresentation of the
truth.
As a surfer and published author in the ICES Journal of Marine
Science in Cannon Beach, I want to preserve our natural storm
barriers and surf the sandbars in the summer. Let nature do its
thing.
Listen to the science: Vote NO on Measure 4-243. Public cost
for private gain!
This information furnished by:
Michael Tarsel
↔
Measure 4-243 has the potential to destroy the dunes as we
know them. Please do as you would with any proposal: analyze
the text and follow the money supporting it.
The Measure compels the City, once every two years, to inventory
beach and dune areas to identify where sand “presents a hazard”
or “impedes safe public access.” It requires identifying areas
where European beach grass contributes to those “hazards.”
Then the City must use its resources—your tax dollars—to
undertake “foredune grading, invasive species removal, and/or
revegetation.”
Nowhere does the Measure define these alleged hazards,
impediments, or unsafe access. What it does authorize is grading
dunes and removing vegetation that holds sand in place.
That means bulldozers and backhoes tearing into the dunes, and
trucks hauling away vegetation and sand. It would devastate a
beautiful, living landscape.
Another reason to scrutinize this proposal: A number of high-
dollar donors supporting the Measure are the same people who,
several years ago, unsuccessfully sought permission to grade the
dunes to improve their views. That effort has not disappeared.
Some neighbors may support this initiative believing it is about
safety. Police and fire department public records, however, show
no past dunes-related incidents.
I am a Chapman Point beachfront homeowner. I love looking at
the dunes and ocean. Can I see the ocean from my lower floor? No.
Do I care? No. I care about the beauty of our dunes and the
protection they provide from storms and a possible tsunami. I
delight seeing people hiking, children playing, and brides and
grooms posing in the dunes for the photographs of a lifetime.
Do I want to see bulldozers destroying all this? No. Do I want our
tax dollars spent on a massive, destructive boondoggle? No.
Please join me in protecting Cannon Beach’s dunes.
Vote NO on Measure 4-243.
This information furnished by:
Louisa S McCleary
↔
I oppose Measure 4-243 because it creates unnecessary
bureaucracy, shifts costs onto the wider community, and
undermines responsible long-term management of Cannon
Beach’s foredunes. This measure would make local dune
management more expensive and reactive.
Measure 4-243 would require record keeping, reporting, and
administrative oversight beyond what the State requires. Yet it
does not explain why these extraordinary obligations are needed,
who will perform the work, or how the added expense will be
paid. The result will be higher cost borne by all Cannon Beach
residents, rather than by the small group of beachfront property
owners who would benefit most directly.
The measure interferes with the current Foredune Management
Plan by replacing its 10-year planning cycle with a biennial cycle
which is too short for sound coastal management. Beaches
and dunes change through seasonal, decadal, and longer-
term sediment cycles. Decisions based on short-term changes
can mistake temporary erosion or accretion for lasting trends,
especially after unusual storm seasons.
That matters because reactive actions such as grading, sand
removal, or shoreline hardening can worsen dune loss and
reduce the natural flood protection foredunes provide. Disturbing
foredunes during increased El Niño activity may put the coast,
homes, streets, and public infrastructure at greater flood risk.
The current Foredune Management Plan gives the City a stable,
science-based window for evaluating natural coastal change
and adjusting policy with better information. Measure 4-243
would encourage short-term responses, increase administrative
burdens, and potentially conflict with the protective purposes of
Oregon’s Goal 18.
Measure 4-243 is not prudent, balanced, or necessary. Cannon
Beach should protect its dunes and taxpayers through careful
long-term planning, not unfunded mandates and short-term
political reactions. I urge voters to protect our community and
oppose Measure 4-243.
Mike, Stacy Benefield
Jim, Jody Morton
Wes, Jan Siebert Warhmund
Rex, Diane Amos
Barb Knop
Lisa Kerr
Colleen Toomey
Jody Yorkey
Dan Hogue
Julie Clark
This information furnished by:
Les Sinclair
↔
DON’T BE FOOLED. VOTE NO ON 4-243.
Measure 4-243 is sold as “safe public beach access.” Its reach
goes far beyond access maintenance into citywide bulldozing
of protective foredunes governed by the State, not the City.
• This measure would amend our City Charter, which is
essentially our constitution. It should not be amended
lightly, especially for a technical program ultimately
governed by the State.
• OPRD, not the City, has jurisdiction over bulldozing
protective foredunes. Applicants must demonstrate need
for OPRD approval. Without it, a bulldozing mandate is
pointless. Where is the citywide need?
• No demonstrated safety crisis. The initiative alleges
“falls,” “injuries from sand collapse,” and emergency-
response problems. In 2019, the Police Chief knew of none;
the Lifeguard Chief reported none in 20 years. Seven years
later, none have been identified.
• The citywide access problem is overstated. 5th Street
is not the City’s responsibility; Breakers Point signed
an agreement long ago to maintain it. A sponsor
acknowledged he had not even asked the City to maintain
6th Street before seeking a Charter amendment. That is
backwards.
• This is a Trojan horse. It requires management of “all
beach and dune areas within City limits,” not just public
beach accesses, and reopens protective foredunes to
bulldozing for views.
• It targets European Beachgrass despite the science and
permitting history. Coastal experts recommended retaining
EBG near developed areas for stabilization. OPRD denied a
Breakers Point application using American beachgrass, then
approved it only after EBG was used.
• We already have a state-approved Foredune
Management Plan, developed through years of science,
expert testimony, and public hearings. It provides public and
emergency access and retains EBG near buildings.
• Taxpayers pay. There is no dedicated funding source. Who
benefits from taxpayer-funded bulldozing: the public, or
oceanfront property owners whose views improve?
If this were really just about safe beach access, it would stop
there. It doesn’t. Don’t be fooled by this Trojan horse. VOTE
NO ON 4-243.
This information furnished by:
Jeff Harrison
↔
I DID THE RESEARCH. VOTE NO ON MEASURE 4-243.
• This is not a safety measure. Fire, police, and lifeguards
have all confirmed on the record that there have been zero
dune-related safety incidents.
• Misleading ballot language. A judge had to rewrite it so
voters could understand what it actually does and that
TAXPAYERS WILL FOOT THE BILL.
• This measure is bankrolled by wealthy oceanfront
property owners at everyone else’s expense. This is not a
grassroots community effort.
• Oceanfront HOAs already lost on appeal. This measure
resurrects an agenda rejected by LUBA (Oregon’s Land Use
Board of Appeals) when beachfront homeowners appealed
Cannon Beach’s dune protections. Now they are trying the
ballot box instead.
• It puts homes and streets at risk. No minimum dune
height means one bad winter storm could send waves and
sand pouring over the top, burying yards, flooding roads,
and damaging property all along the beachfront and into our
town.
• It actively threatens our wildlife. Our current plan sets
science-based limits to protect habitat for razor clams,
shellfish, and native dune plants. This measure sets none.
• It’s a blank check. With no cost cap, no dedicated funding
source, and indefinite grading of city, state, and private land,
this initiative creates an open-ended mandate with zero
limits.
• It scars the town we love. Continuous bulldozing would
replace a living, natural shoreline with an artificial one. It will
PERMANENTLY CHANGE THE CHARACTER OF CANNON
BEACH for everyone. Taxpayers will pay the price for the
benefit of a handful of property owners.
How this even reached our ballot is beyond me. Let’s protect our
town, preserve our beloved coastline, and shut the final door on
this unfair taxpayer shakedown.
VOTE NO ON MEASURE 4-243
This information furnished by:
Sherry Genauer
↔
NO on Measure 4-243, A Trojan Horse by Any Other Name.
As a former Cannon Beach Planning Commissioner, I am
familiar with the effects that misguided land use law can have
on management of critical natural resources. Measure 4-243, if
adopted, is one such law:
1. It inserts Cannon Beach into management of land under
state jurisdiction – an unfunded mandate.
2. It sets up conflict between the City Charter and land use
standards and guidelines set forth in the city’s zoning
ordinance, including provisions of the existing Foredune
Management Plan.
3. It narrows the City’s foredune management policy from
maintaining and stabilizing dunes, a policy broad enough to
include safety, to reducing “hazards caused by unstable or
overgrown foredunes,’ a policy that excludes all else.
4. It fails to define “hazards,” a word that can be construed, if
you listen to supporters, to cover everything from property
damage to the physical convenience of “visitors.”
The sponsors have been careful to avoid discussion of intent
beyond what they call the “clear language” of the Measure. And
yet, that is exactly what will be required if the Measure passes, to
look beneath the language to resolve these and other ambiguities.
Given the Measure’s aggressive compliance schedule, City staff,
City Council, and the Planning Commission will be doing little else
for the foreseeable future.
The Measure is a rehash of claims brought against the City
before the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) four years ago to
strike down provisions of the existing Foredune Management
Plan prohibiting grading for views. The sponsors chose to use
language in their findings of fact drawn from claims against the
City rejected by LUBA under state law.
One has to wonder if the Measure isn’t just a cynical attempt to
generate enough chaos to backdoor by misdirection the result
its sponsors couldn’t achieve by litigation, the enabling of the
grading of foredunes to restore views.
This information furnished by:
Mike Bates
↔
I oppose Measure 4-243 because it is vague and ambiguous,
leading to unpredictable results. It runs contrary to principles of
good governance to amend the City’s Charter for such a purpose
and with poorly constructed language.
This Measure mixes terms and is unclear as to both purpose
and what actions will be required if the Measure is passed. As
an attorney practicing administrative law, I worry how the City of
Cannon Beach – or a court – would interpret the provisions. More
concerning is that the Measure appears to be ambiguous by
design: it was written by expensive attorneys from Portland who
are fully capable of writing concise and highly specific regulatory
language. When they write with ambiguity, it is by design.
I have experienced firsthand the complexity of interpreting vague
City code. This Measure would result in a quagmire of confusing
terms and conflicting interpretations. The result: expensive legal
battles paid for by our taxpayer dollars.
We do not need to introduce this ambiguity to our City’s
governance. We already have City code designed to address the
stated purposes for the Measure. There are already mechanisms
for addressing dune safety and beach access, and for managing
Cannon Beach’s dunes in accordance with well-substantiated
practices and the best available science. Enforcement of existing
code is the most logical approach.
The appropriate avenue to change foredune activity is through
amending city ordinances. Yet, this Measure seeks to amend the
City’s Charter. Amendments to a City’s Charter are very difficult
to reverse, unlike simple ordinances. If this Measure turns out to
be unworkable or not in the City’s best interest, it will be a costly
mistake and difficult to undo.
There is too much risk in passing this Measure, which lacks clarity
and proposes long-term changes to the City Charter without a
clear and governance-related purpose. I make this statement in
my personal capacity and not as a member of the Cannon Beach
Planning Commission.
This information furnished by:
Anna Moritz, Esq.
↔
Public Cost. Private Gain. Vote NO.
For 12 years the Friends of the Dunes, a grassroots group, has
protected the dunes that protect us all.
Campaign-finance records reveal every donor, except one, owns
oceanfront property, and only a couple are full-time residents. This
is not a community mandate. It is funded by those who benefit
most from dune grading.
Proponents say they support the Foredune Management Plan
(FMP). That is misleading. They argue dunes are too tall, steep,
and wide, making the beach less open, safe, and welcoming. Yet
the FMP’s stated objective is to:
“Maintain and stabilize the existing foredunes and encourage
sand deposition on the seaward portion of the foredunes with the
goal to at least maintain existing foredune widths.”
That differs from authorizing dune grading to flatten and narrow
dunes based on unsupported safety and access claims. The
measure provides no clear limits or funding source.
The FMP prioritizes healthy dunes that protect us from erosion,
winter storms, flooding and sand inundation. Public records show
local fire, police, and lifeguard officials records confirm no dune-
related safety incidents. The Fire District insists grading would not
improve emergency operations.
The measure’s focus on European beach grass is telling:
American beach grass is also invasive and co-dominant, but
European builds slightly taller dunes—raising questions whether
the goal is invasive-species removal or improved ocean views.
This initiative would override the FMP’s goals by disguising dune
grading as a public-safety and access issue to benefit oceanfront
property owners. Instead, it could allow alteration of public dunes
for private benefits, including improved ocean views, all at public
cost.
The initiative would be locked into the City Charter, rather than
allowing adaptation as science, coastal conditions, and shoreline-
management practices evolve.
Take note, a judge rewrote the ballot caption and question,
putting “management” in quotation marks because it’s used
differently from its ordinary meaning—which is misleading.
Vote NO.
This information furnished by:
Friends of the Dunes at Cannon Beach
↔
Friends of Haystack Rock opposes this Measure, which carries
potential threats to Cannon Beach’s vibrant tidal and intertidal
habitats. Cannon Beach hosts two designated Marine Gardens
located at Chapman Point and Haystack Rock, where dunes,
beaches, and tidepools function as one connected ecosystem.
Foredune grading and vegetation removal required under the
Measure would destabilize sand that is naturally held in place by
beach grass. Altering dunes can change how wind, waves, and
sand move across the beach, affecting tidepools and intertidal
habitat. Increased sand movement could bury tidepools, expose
them to greater erosion, or change the conditions that marine life
depend upon.
Tidepools are a balance of water, rock, sand, and shelter
supporting a remarkable variety of familiar wildlife from barnacles
to sea stars. Changes to the beach and intertidal zone can
damage feeding areas and can bury or expose animals that
cannot simply move elsewhere.
Thousands of seabirds – including Tufted Puffin and Black
Oystercatcher – and other marine wildlife that thrive at Haystack
Rock and the surrounding intertidal areas would be disturbed by
activity from heavy machinery conducting dune grading.
Cannon Beach already has a plan to manage local foredunes.
The City’s comprehensive Foredune Management Plan was
developed over a four-year period including stakeholder
meetings, scientific review, and careful consideration of systems
for dune management that protect local ecosystems and ensure
visitor and resident safety. Measure 4-243 undermines that
extensive effort.
The Measure does not include any scientific analysis of
environmental impacts. Furthermore, we are not aware of analysis
regarding the impact of destabilized dunes on beachgoers.
Thousands of visitors come every year to enjoy the tidepools and
seabirds that live along our unique coastline. We must protect
both the natural habitat and the experience of beachgoers who
come to appreciate our vibrant coastline.
Cannon Beach’s coastline is a precious community resource.
We should protect the dunes and the wildlife that depend
upon them—not reshape them without fully understanding the
consequences.
This information furnished by:
Friends of Haystack Rock
↔
Oregon Coast Alliance urges a NO vote on ballot measure 4-243.
First and foremost, it is an unfunded mandate — taxpayers will
pay for it to be implemented. The ballot measure is financially
reckless: not only will taxpayers fund it, but there are no limits
to the costs that residents will have to pay. Cannon Beach
residents should not have their taxes go to undermining the city’s
already-implemented and successful Foredune Management
Plan. The current Plan protects the dunes, requiring replanting
based on the best science available. Most importantly, the Plan
eliminates dune-grading for views, a wise decision taken by City
Council after years of controversy over view grading. Cannon
Beach’s plan was upheld by the Land Use Board of Appeals; it
is legitimate and working well to manage the dunes for wildlife,
storm and wave protection, and the beauty of the ocean shore
that draws visitors to the region. It also allows for dune-grading
as needed, such as for sand removal around buildings.
Measure 4-243 places dune management in the City Charter,
Cannon Beach’s governing document. This is inappropriate. Dune
management is not governance, and should not be locked into
the Charter.
If this measure passes, it may end up causing conflict with the
state law that governs replanting after dune-grading, which is
administered by the Oregon Parks and Recreation Department.
No measure passed by Cannon Beach can conflict with or
override state law. The result would be gridlock. Cannon Beach
does not need a court fight over management of its dunes. There
is a working system in place.
The Foredune Management Plan provides a balance between
needed dune-grading and dune protection, and meshes with
state requirements on replanting to keep the dunes stabilized,
necessary in a built environment like Cannon Beach. Please do
not let false safety concerns sway you: there have been no safety
incidents in Cannon Beach involving the dunes. Vote NO on
Measure 4-243.
This information furnished by:
Oregon Coast Alliance
↔
Surfrider Foundation North Coast Chapter and our members in
Cannon Beach urge residents to vote NO on the ill-informed and
deceptive measure 4-243.
VOTE NO - Taxpayers shouldn’t be left footing the bill for
private interests.
If this measure passes, taxpayers would be paying for views
of oceanfront homes, many of which are vacation homes and
rentals, not permanent residences. That’s like signing a blank
check for oceanfront homeowners to destroy the public dunes for
their private views - a short-sighted trick that leaves the financial
burden on taxpayers.
It’s NOT about public access or public safety.
Baseless claims imply that this measure will improve public safety
and access - this has been discredited by the Fire District itself.
This will not meaningfully improve beach access, but will rather
put the shoreline in a constant state of construction, and will
threaten the long-term resilience of the beach and community.
VOTE NO - It’s not backed by science.
This measure is unsupported by the experts. Top experts in the
state on beachgrass, shoreline dynamics, and coastal engineering
confirm that removing the top layer of sand and dune grass
wouldn’t meaningfully restore Cannon Beach’s dunes, and would
more likely create a perpetual construction zone - that’s bad for
beaches, bad for tourism, and bad for business.
Proponents of this measure, many of whom don’t live in Cannon
Beach and cannot vote here, lack the long-term perspective
of how Cannon Beach’s sand moves over time. While sand is
currently collecting on the north end, this is a cyclical pattern
which will eventually shift and deposit sand on the southern end
of the beach. This cycle is evident from the seawalls that were
erected on the north end that are now buried by sand.
The City’s current plan was developed with experts and members
of the Cannon Beach community.
Is now the time to spend taxpayer money on oceanfront homes?
Or should our hard-earned money be spent on more important
community services?
This information furnished by:
Doug Mitchell, Bryan Steelman, and local members on behalf of
the North Coast Chapter of Surfrider Foundation
Paid for by Friends of the Dunes at Cannon Beach - No on 4-243
Want to read the the voters’ pamphlet? [Download Measure 4-243 section, as a PDF.]
Paid for by Friends of the Dunes at Cannon Beach - No on 4-243